Brewing climate friendly tea in the garden

Recently, when I was attending my local community seed swop in rural Lewes in East Sussex, in England, I came across an allegedly environmentally friendly version of charcoal called biochar, which the industry mouthpieces are promoting as an alleged way of keeping carbon in the soil reducing greenhouse gas emissions, while at the same time improving soil fertility and thus the productivity of crops. Really?

It is fairly well known that you can use charcoal to heat your house or to cook your food. Biochar, however, is a type of coal that is created when you burn biomass and the biochar industry is promoting biochar as an alleged way of keeping carbon in the soil and thus reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the soil, while at the same time improving soil fertility and thus the productivity of crops. This concept is currently being sold to unsuspecting farming communities around the world, but it could be a complete waste of money as the actual benefit of biochar is yet to be proven.

In Lewes, the biochar industry lobby was a the seed swap, where it was trying to bring on board unsuspecting but keen allotment holders to the biochar cause, by telling them how biochar can be used to make the local soil more fertile, though the degree to which results offer long term carbon sequestration in practice has been challenged.

The industry wants to launch biochar commercially in rural communities around the world; the seed swap in Lewes provides the industry with the right test audience. The seed swap features among other things practical advice on saving seed, good fruit tree health, willow weaving, and this year also biochar stoves for tea-making.

In principle, adding a stable form of organic carbon to farm soils is a good old idea; it could sequester carbon and at the same time increase soil fertility and farm productivity. This is the principle of proven ecological farming practices. Current biochar projects are however mainly small scale and still in development. Despite this, the biochar lobby is already touting this potentially false unproven climate solution, which could prove to waste money that could be better spent on developing more certain ecological practices, like avoiding bare soil, growing legumes and cover crops. So, biochar may not be the right way to go for small farming communities in England or elsewhere in the world. Uncertainties surrounding biochar include how long the carbon would actually be locked in the soil, and how biochar improves soil fertility in the first place as simple chicken manure has been shown to produce higher crop yields than fertilizing with biochar.

The biochar lobby may well be using local community-based events, like the seed swap in Lewes, to build grassroots support for their business, but their optimistic claims need to be balanced with information about the uncertainty of their solution and the corporate interests in getting biochar and soil carbon included into carbon markets.

Testing biochar in my own allotment may tell me something about its use in improving soil fertility and yields, but testing for soil organic carbon is not something that can be done in the back garden and will probably not prove to be any allotment owner’s cup up tea!

In the context of chemical fertilisers, biochar may be seen as a 'false' solution to climate change mitigation in agriculture and an obstacle for a real move towards ecological soil fertility without chemical fertilisers and without green washing.

Iza Kruszewska is a sustainable agriculture campaigner for Greenpeace International. Iza lives and works in Lewes, where she is active in the local allotment community.

Clarification added on 20 February 2012: There were two talks on biochar at Seedy Saturday: one by James Greyson on making biochar cookers; and one by Craig Sams from Carbon Gold on the use of biochar in developing countries. Iza did not go to the talk by James Greyson on biochar cookers and the blog refers to the talk by Craig Sams, not the talk by James Greyson.

Hi Iza, it was good to meet you at the Lewes seed swop. I'm sorry you didn't make it to my 'climate-friendly tea' talk or take up my i...

Hi Iza, it was good to meet you at the Lewes seed swop. I'm sorry you didn't make it to my 'climate-friendly tea' talk or take up my invitation to come around to chat over a cup of it. Also unfortunate that you didn't choose to call me on the number I gave you to learn whether I have any biochar industry connections (I don't) before writing to the world that I do. Please remove or correct your article.

I've been a fan of Greenpeace for decades and admire the high standard of work. This article however falls short of a professional standard. Uninformed attacks on people who share your goals aren't good for anyone's reputation, especially Greenpeace's. Surely organisations run on charitable donations have a responsibility to do better than leaps from misunderstanding to misinformation?

I'd be delighted to work with Greenpeace on this topic but would advise a rigorous effort to advance understanding and collaboration. There are important things to get right with biochar but this article doesn't identify them. Time is short for the critical issues connected with biochar, the opportunities are immense and we can do better than belligerent soapboxing.

Post a comment

OPTIONAL: Register to avoid filling out forms each time you post a comment
Sign Up Here
login via Facebook or Google

(Unregistered) adrienne from Lewes
says:

I was also at the biochar event in Lewes and one of the organisers of Transition Town Lewes. I'm one of Iza's allotment neighbours and was dis...

I was also at the biochar event in Lewes and one of the organisers of Transition Town Lewes. I'm one of Iza's allotment neighbours and was disappointed in what came across as a 'rant' rather than a measured analysis of the issues. I suspect that industrial scale use of biochar to make moeny from the carbon market has real problems, but I given biochar's use as a soil conditioner and more importantly, carbon squester, can these not be overcome, eg by stipluating that only waste wood and adgriculture by products be used etc rather than specially-grown eg eucalyptus plantations.

Personally, i am trialling biochar on my allotment and will be encouraging others to both use it and make it in well-designed stoves and other systems.

Post a comment

OPTIONAL: Register to avoid filling out forms each time you post a comment
Sign Up Here
login via Facebook or Google

(Unregistered) Iza K
says:

Other than the Lewes seed swap, the only places where I come across people promoting biochar is at international climate-agriculture conferences. So I...

Other than the Lewes seed swap, the only places where I come across people promoting biochar is at international climate-agriculture conferences. So I was surprised to see not one, but two talks featuring biochar at the local event.

Biochar may well be a useful soil conditioner, but it is not a proven climate solution.
UNEP’s Year Book 2012, released today warns: "Carbon credits will only be eﬀective if SOC sequestration can be adequately monitored and evaluated, and if long-term social and environmental impacts are adequately considered alongside short-term economic beneﬁts." http://www.unep.org/yearbook/2012/pdfs/UYB_2012_CH_2.pdf

I also took away a sample of biochar to see if there’s any difference in yields on my allotment; it will not tell me anything about soil carbon. But robust scientific testing cannot not be done in the back garden…..particularly when there’s big money to be made from carbon markets.

Post a comment

OPTIONAL: Register to avoid filling out forms each time you post a comment
Sign Up Here
login via Facebook or Google

listenin
says:

Economic incentives offer no analyses on the effect of adding charcoal to soils. For those who have these concerns:

One study on the effe...

Economic incentives offer no analyses on the effect of adding charcoal to soils. For those who have these concerns:

One study on the effect of adding charcoal to boreal soil showed a net carbon loss. Here I am, and you like me, somewhere between boreal and tropical. Perhaps reference to this study has been offered in this thread; I haven't the link right now.

Charcoal is extremely porous; adding charcoal introduces substrate on which micro-organisms can thrive. Which organisms? Surely adding charcoal does change the native ecology.

Studies have shown increased productivity, not increased fertility. Studies have been misrepresented. The increase in productivity brought by charcoal declines as the fertility goes up. Fertility itself needs thorough examination. Why is any soil poor?

“Biochar” can last in soils for 1000 years precisely because nothing eats it (except for some house cats). Surely before altering our soils for 1000 years we should thoroughly examine the effects of what we do rather than listen to marketing gimmicks.

Post a comment

OPTIONAL: Register to avoid filling out forms each time you post a comment
Sign Up Here
login via Facebook or Google

(Unregistered) marina pepper
says:

Hi - I can't answer for the product but one fact Craig has very wrong. Transition Town does NOT organise Seedy Saturday. It is an annual event - o...

Hi - I can't answer for the product but one fact Craig has very wrong. Transition Town does NOT organise Seedy Saturday. It is an annual event - organised now by common cause and the district council. I KNOW. I started the event when I was Chair of the council. Glad to see it's still providing a platform for debate.

Can't speak for or against the product but my heart always sinks when we're encouraged top pay for stuff to improve our soil. That sits awkwardly with me.

Post a comment

OPTIONAL: Register to avoid filling out forms each time you post a comment
Sign Up Here
login via Facebook or Google

(Unregistered) Erichj
says:

(except for some house cats).
The eco-footprints of the family pet each year as calculated by the Vales in a book called "Time to eat the D...

(except for some house cats).
The eco-footprints of the family pet each year as calculated by the Vales in a book called "Time to eat the Dog":

German shepherds: 1.1 hectares, compared with 0.41ha for a large SUV.

Cats: 0.15ha (slightly less than a Volkswagen Golf). Hamsters: 0.014ha (two of them equate to a medium-sized plasma TV).

Goldfish: 0.00034ha (an eco-finprint equal to two cellphones).
a medium dog eats 164 kilograms of meat and 95kg of cereals every year. It takes 43.3 square metres of land to produce 1kg of chicken a year. This means it takes 0.84 hectares to feed Fido.

They compared this with the footprint of a Toyota Land Cruiser, driven 10,000km a year, which uses 55.1 gigajoules (the energy used to build and fuel it). One hectare of land can produce 135 gigajoules a year, which means the vehicle's eco-footprint is 0.41ha – less than half of the dog's.

Carbon Terra goes Whole Hog, or ....Dog
Integration of nutrient management with biochar energy systems only addresses one end of animal husbandry. Manure chars can bring in Nutrient Credit income, and save 50%+ of NH3 loss in composting with Biochars, but to reduce the total carbon hoof prints , intestinal wee-Beasties must also be fostered.
Iwamoto's SuperStoeClean had the first feed supplement products for livestock & Aquaculture; the shrimp, clams , ells, gold fish & odorless egg's side by side photos amaze me.
http://superstoneclean.com/video-presentations/

Anecdotaly, a poultry farmer commented at the Rodale Institute site that char from the gizzards was ground to shiny gem stones.
Last week the study from Oz I posted, added to this menagerie; flounder, ducks & goats;

The Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences.
http://envnewsbits.wordpress.com/2012/01/30/biochar-implications-for-agricultural-productivity/

Dr. Christoph Steiner at BlackCarbon DK, also follows this totally integrated pathway.
Black Carbon Integrated Pathways Project, DK, http://www.blackcarbon.dk/ , as the most forward vision for the industry.
A one billion ton carbon sequestration vision, supported by the established biomass infrastructure and policy incentives in the EU. A decentralized plan for combined heat & power production with biochar products for the mandated replacement of Peat-Moss as a major market driver. A finalist for Sir Richard Branson's Virgin Earth Challenge prize. The second most cited researcher on biochar soils, Dr. Christoph Steiner, as their lead scientist has formulated an array of products for horticulture, agriculture and animal husbandry, ,

Now I find that Dr. Bernd Schottdorf at
Carbon Terra, http://www.carbon-terra.eu/en/home are offering a full line of Carbon Feeds; Carbon Feed (Livestock), CarbonDog & CarbonCat and for a Silage mix.
A full range of Fertilizers; CarbonFertilizer Field, CarbonFertilizer Garden & CarbonFertilizer Flower.

From what I've read of previous Feed Ration work from Japan the improved metrics run the gamut;80+% reduced odor, less mortality, increased feed conversion rates, general health and product quality.

Post a comment

OPTIONAL: Register to avoid filling out forms each time you post a comment
Sign Up Here
login via Facebook or Google

(Unregistered) Nickel
says:

I very much admire Iza's vigour and enthusiasm in pursuit ecological and environmental improvements.
I don't know how old Iza is; (I am...

I very much admire Iza's vigour and enthusiasm in pursuit ecological and environmental improvements.
I don't know how old Iza is; (I am 55), and I distinctly remember from my childhood just about every gardener on my estate taking char/charcoal/soot at every opportunity to work into the soil on garden and allotment.
When I speak about this to some of the old codgers, (who are no longer capable of gardening), they all nod in agreement. It is possible that Iza has no long-term relatives in uk who have been tilling the land for umpteen generations to pass down this information.
Bio-char is not a modern, suspect/dodgy product that is being foisted on the gullible. Quite apart from the carbon aspect, it is an age-old method of returning minerals and metal salts(sodium/potassium etc) to the soil. If these salts were put into landfill, the soil would become depleted and barren, requiring man-made additives.
Let us consider mother nature: Forests regenerate very well on the char from natural forest fires. Vegetation grows very well on volcanic soils with the metal salts and minerals deposited. What we take out, we must replace in moderation.
To Iza: I would suggest a lot more research before casting doubt on tried and tested methods that have worked for the many centuries of agriculture before industrial development. With more knowledge and a slight tempering of reactionary attitude, you will be of great benefit to the cause.